直 Japanese PDF Font
  • Our Professionals
  • Our Work
  • Our Insights
  • Offices
  • Firm
  • Careers
Finnegan
  • News
  • Finnegan Facts
  • History
    • Finnegan VISION
    • Finnegan FORWARD
  • Pro Bono
  • Management
    • Pricing & Alternative Fee Arrangements
    • AFA Models We Offer
    • Contingency Fees
    • AI + KM

Media Mention

TTAB: KINGS ARMOR Mark for Various Apparel Products Succumbs to Cancellation Challenge

April 3, 2025

IP Law Daily

Finnegan client Under Armour successfully convinced the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) to reject Valiant Praize Productions LLC’s (Valiant) attempt to register a mark. Using the DuPont factors, the TTAB found that several factors support a likelihood of confusion between Valiant’s KINGS ARMOR mark and Under Armour’s UNDER ARMOUR mark, which are both used for clothing.

The TTAB cited that the similarities between the two stem from the use of the word ARMOR or ARMOUR in the British spelling, which was the dominant element of the respective marks and significant in creating the commercial impression of each mark. Both marks are also similar in connotation and commercial impression due to the shared word ARMO(U)R. With that, the TTAB concluded that the first DuPont factor weighs in favor of  a conclusion of likelihood of confusion given the marks are more similar than dissimilar with regard to appearance, sound, and commercial impression.

Read “TTAB: KINGS ARMOR Mark for Various Apparel Products Succumbs to Cancellation Challenge”

Related Practices

Trademark and Brand Management

Trademark Oppositions and Cancellations

Related Industries

Hospitality, Gaming, and Leisure

Sports, Fitness, and Outdoor Recreation

Related Offices

Washington, DC

Related Professionals

Douglas A. Rettew
Partner
Washington, DC
+1 202 408 4161
Email
Patrick J. Rodgers
Associate
Washington, DC
+1 202 408 4374
Email

Related News

Press Release

Finnegan Secures Summary Determination of No Violation in ITC Vehicle Space Guards Investigation for Drop Stop

October 6, 2026

Commentary

Catching Up with Hope Shimabuku

September 29, 2026

Commentary

Federal Circuit Revives Whistleblower Complaint Over VA's AI Claims-Processing Tool

September 25, 2026

Award/Ranking

Finnegan Named an IP Litigation Powerhouse in BTI Litigation Outlook 2027

September 24, 2026

Award/Ranking

Finnegan Receives Top Tier Rankings in World Trademark Review’s Inaugural Copyright 1000 2026

September 23, 2026

Press Release

Finnegan Secures Precedential Pro Bono Federal Circuit Victory for AI Whistleblower

September 23, 2026

Commentary

New Thomas Pink Womenswear Lines Strain ‘Pink’ Pact with Victoria’s Secret

September 21, 2026

Commentary

Pepsi's U.S. Trademark Dispute Could Reshape Brand Choices, Lawsuit Strategy, Lawyers Say

September 17, 2026

Commentary

Jellycat’s ‘Dupe’ Dilemma: Can IP Protect a ‘Cute’ Aesthetic?

September 16, 2026

Due to international data regulations, we’ve updated our privacy policy. Click here to read our privacy policy in full.

  • Privacy
  • Disclaimer
  • Legal Notices
  • Fraud Alert
  • EEO Statement
  • Cookies
  • Contact Us

© 2026 Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP